Social Media Biggest Regulation Target Since Radio

Radio was still in its crib in 1910, but there were already calls for Congress to regulate the nascent medium.

It took Congress until 1927 to pass the Radio Act to regulate unrestricted use of the airwaves. Congress then approved the more comprehensive Communications Act of 1934. That established the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and created the regulatory protocols still in place today.

In fact, many radio station owners in the 1930s demanded congressional intervention. The problem is that there is only so much space on the electromagnetic spectrum. Broadcasters were stepping all over the signals of one another. No one controlled how much power each station radiated. There were problems with the allocation of frequencies. The FCC helped settle which station showed up where in the dial – and in which city. 

Today, Fox News Digital reports the internet was similar when it started. However, as activity online soared, Congress intervened. It approved the Telecommunications Act of 1996. A portion of that law addressed how internet firms were exempt from publishing indecent, obscene or even controversial content. That portion of the law is called Section 230. The 1997 Supreme Court case Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union found the "decency" portion of the broader Telecommunications Act to be unconstitutional. However, the High Court decided it could slice away Section 230 and allow it to stand. 

Lawmakers from both sides have argued over retooling Section 230. The concern now is that big tech firms and social media giants like Meta (which owns Facebook), Twitter and others enjoy an impenetrable legal shield that safeguards them from any challenges to what their users post. In fact, there are arguments that social media algorithms are calibrated in such a way to promote and manifest only the most controversial, sometimes diabolical, content. That creates a vicious circle as such posts generate more attention, fuel outrage in the real world and spur similar videos and articles which feed on themselves.

Congress is nowhere close to fine-tuning Section 230. So, there is talk now of perhaps developing an entirely new regulatory regime. The reason? Lawmakers fear that what goes down online is so bad it could threaten national security.

The Senate Judiciary Committee and Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee recntly held two days of hearings recently to explore threats posed by social media firms.

Senators have met with Twitter whistleblower Peiter "Mudge" Zatko since late August. Twitter fired Zatko as its security chief earlier this year. Zatko told senators there is an opportunity for foreign intelligence services to burrow their way into Twitter and work undercover as a spy there. In fact, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., even suggested that foreign intelligence services "aren’t doing a very good job" if they do not try to place a spook inside of Twitter. 

Zatko characterized Twitter as "a gold mine" for spy agencies.

Social media the latest in a line of Big Tech regulation targets since radio made waves in Congress https://t.co/p2s75uM8RO #FoxNews

— Tom Benson (@Tombenson1) September 19, 2022

Zatko said the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is "in over its head" when it comes to regulating Twitter.

"Clearly what we’re doing right now is not working," said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.

That is why Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is prepping legislation alongside Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., to create a new regulatory agency just for big tech firms. He notes that Congress created the FTC in 1914.

"A lot has happened since 1914," said Graham.

One of Graham’s proposals is to require social media firms to hold a license – just like what was mandated for broadcasters beginning in the 1930s.

"If you had a license and misbehavior on your part could result in you losing your license that would get their attention," said Graham. "This is a wakeup call for Congress."